​​Rail Corporation, Shenzhen lawyer Zhuyun De Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Passenger limited liability company a piece of paper v. sued to court, decree High Speed ​​Rail Corporation Shenzhen North to Guangzhou South overcharged him returned to Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Passenger The ticket costs 29 yuan. But then the Guangzhou Railway Transport Court appealing in fact,
toms outlet, ticket pricing mechanism does not belong to the the court accepts scope of inadmissible on the grounds. Yesterday the lawyer to appeal, saying the court had inadmissible "on the ground with the facts, absurd. Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong high-speed rail a little high priced lawyer said he calculated in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations, pricing of high-speed rail, a violation of the legitimate rights and interests of consumers. He told this reporter said that due to work reasons, he frequently to and from Shenzhen, Guangzhou and Changsha, many times to take the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong passenger line from North Station in Shenzhen to Guangzhou South Railway Station. However, according to the State Planning Commission on the problem of high-grade soft-seat express train fare reply "(pricing tube No. 19971068), running speed can reach more than 110 kilometers per hour EMU train Comfortable Seat benchmark price for the second The car was 0.2805 yuan,
ray ban, plus or minus 10%, a result,
ray ban, ordinary EMU second seat per kilometer fare up to not more than 0.31 yuan,
hogan. Secondly,
longchamp, the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong high-speed rail as the Wuhan-Guangzhou high-speed rail extension cord should be based on the pricing policies of the Wuhan-Guangzhou high-speed rail pricing. Now running the Wuhan-Guangzhou high-speed rail full length of 1068.6 km, the fare is about 0,
mulberry.435 yuan per kilometer,
oakley pas cher, if the same price as the standard implementation of the Wuhan-Guangzhou high-speed rail, the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong high-speed railway, Guangzhou-Shenzhen section second-class seat fare should be around $ 46, $ than Wuhan-Guangzhou high-speed rail is $ 29 higher. Zhuyun De said the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail is related to the vital interests of the public service, shall be guided by the government. Appellee more than twice the price of government guidance higher pricing, not only in violation of the relevant provisions of the "Price Law" serious infringement of the appellant as the interests of consumers. He had sued the Guangzhou Railway Transport Court,
hogan, requested the court to determine the return of multi-ticket prices for 29 yuan. Why my lawsuit will not be accepted Subsequently,
abercrombie, the Guangzhou Railway Transport Court appealing to the appellant's ticket pricing mechanism does not belong to the People's Court accepted the scope of the civil action on the grounds the prosecution of the appellant inadmissible. But in the civil complaint, the appellant has made it clear that, because appellee in violation of state ticket pricing mechanism, not in accordance with government guidance pricing,
ray ban, and require appellee returned illegal overcharged ticket costs 29 yuan. The aspirations of the appellant throughout the for appellee illegal pricing, rather than train tickets in China pricing mechanism, the Guangzhou Railway Transport Court ground of inadmissibility is indeed ridiculous pretenses. Zhu said the lawyer,
hogan outlet, he will persist in the end to fight the lawsuit, because this relates to the rights and interests of the large number of consumers, so on this issue "seriously" is worth it. In addition, he said, "I January 10, 2013 to the Guangzhou Railway Transport Court sued the hospital for civil ruling 'material after March 29, 2013 to make inadmissible.' Article 123 of the Civil Procedure Law ', in line with the conditions for prosecution, should the case within seven days, notify the parties,
ray ban online shop; does not meet the conditions for prosecution, the ruling should be made within seven days, will not be accepted, but the appellant repeated reminders on March 29, 2013 to make the civil ruling,
ray ban, without undue delay of nearly three months,
hollister. "(original title: Shenzhen lawyer to sue high-speed rail to retire 29)Related articles:
said in an interview with the Southern rural newspaper reporter reporters call us to Zhang Xian but then become addicted to gambling